National’s unaffordable tax cuts to be funded by… (checks notes) …giving more people lung cancer.

  • David PalmerOP
    link
    English
    17 months ago

    Weird take tbh… we currently restrict sale of these products to people over 18 - I don’t see this as much of a change from that conceptually. It’s a clever method as it allows current addicts to continue without a sudden cold-turkey stop, but makes it much harder for future generations to gain access to tobacco.

    We need to end the tobacco industry somehow, and this is a reasonable way to taper it out of existence. Other scrapped plans include removing nicotine and other addictive substances from tobacco, and removing tobacco from being sold in dairies and service stations.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      27 months ago

      we currently restrict sale of these products to people over 18

      Did I not just address this? Was I circumspect?

      Any law that forever excludes you from an activity that is otherwise legal - is not the same thing as limiting things to certain ages. No kidding a child born now can’t drive. But if they still can’t drive, sixteen years from now, while people who can drive now are still allowed to drive, that’s obviously not the same thing as saying ‘you have to be sixteen to drive.’

      It is a fundamentally different restriction.

      That form of restriction cannot be tolerated, no matter how grand the goal. It is incompatible with equality under the law. It is treating certain people differently, for life, for circumstances unrelated to ability, capacity, or safety.

      If the industry is awful then it’s awful for everyone and should be banned for everyone. “Clever” in this case means “unethical, with extra steps.”

      • @liv
        link
        17 months ago

        To me it was the best way of phasing the law in for everyone because it’s unfair on addicts to suddenly criminalize their addiction.

    • @Ilovethebomb
      link
      07 months ago

      we currently restrict sale of these products to people over 18 - I don’t see this as much of a change from that conceptually.

      Genuinely unintelligent take, to be honest. There is a huge difference between not letting a child do something, and never letting a person do something, even when an adult only a few days older can legally do so.

      It’s a weird law, and it’s probably a good thing it’s been repealed.